It's never been a secret that pro-level wireless audio manufacturers are nervous about the
Wireless Innovation Alliance's whitespace internet plans, but now that Google's taken the
fight to the people directly, various equipment makers are starting to air their concerns publicly -- and with millions of dollars in gear and people's livelihoods on the line, they aren't being shy about it. "We are worried the FCC will buckle and allow white space to be used by personal portable devices seeking wireless services," says Letrasonic's Karl Winkler, as professional wireless audio systems like those used in theaters and rock venues exist in the same frequency spectrum and redesigning them to avoid interference could "cost big productions millions of dollars." That's of course the same concern groups like the
NAB had about television broadcasts, but where we can see consumers being willing to put up with some TV static to get cheaper net access, we don't think rock bands and stage performers will be as willing to compromise -- and although Motorola says its geolocation system will
prevent any interference, it doesn't sound like the industry is ready to buy it. Of course, all these hysterics are based on nothing more than speculation and rumors, since basically no one's ever seen a whitespace device in use -- maybe if one of the giant companies backing the tech would actually demo some of this vapor, people wouldn't be so nervous about it. Just a suggestion -- albeit one we've been making for
months now.
posted Aug 20th 2008 9:40AM
t's about to get ugly out there. I like it. Go google!
First the musicians take my Napster... now they want to ruin my whitespace internetz possibilities? I wish I were deaf.
They're all complaining "blah blah we were here first! this has been our frequency for years!"
Yeah ask the Native Americans how that type of defense usually works out. Usually ends with a ripped treaty and a trail of tears....
All... Most kidding aside... get the hell out of the way of progress please. Comcast is breakin' my balls.
White space in telecommunications refers to unused frequencies in the radio waves portion of the electromagnetic spectrum.
National and international bodies assign differing frequencies for specific uses, and in some cases license the rights to these. This frequency allocation process creates a bandplan which in some cases for technical reasons assigns white space between used bands to avoid interference. In this case, while the frequencies are unused they have been specifically assigned for a purpose.
As well as this technical assignment, there is also unused spectrum which has either never been used, or is becoming free as a result of technical changes. In particular, the planned switchover to digital television may free up large areas between 54MHz and 698MHz. Various proposals including from the White Spaces Coalition propose to use this to provide broadband Internet access. However, these efforts may impact wireless microphones and other technologies that have historically relied on these frequencies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_space_(telecommunications)
Thank you captain obvious. What was the point of your post other then to post something from Wikipedia that we already knew? Well beyond the actual frequencies that is. Or is this just a FIRST! Post disguised as something trying to be meaningful?
*drinks his caffeine* Its too early in the morning for this shit....
Well, speaking for the lazy people who didn't want to search, I thank you.
Although, I would have been just as happy with just the link, and you could have saved Jon Doe his regular morning gripefest.
Wait, so there's a chance I won't be allowed to bring my portable media device with digital video recorder into concerts or theaters?
Well many of us sound people are getting pretty angry about this. The FCC auctioned off that 700MHz+ spectrum off which will make existing wireless systems useless. For the people that regularly use these high-end systems in the upper blocks, you're looking at an approximate $3000+ loss for each system in order to switch over to a lower legal block. Okay, now Google wants to take what's left from us? Crap.
In high TV/Film production and broadcast areas such as NY and LA it's already a struggle to find a nice clean frequency block to use. The uses of these wireless microphones are not limited to just music and stage performances. These are used during TV broadcasts, documentaries, some of your favorite TV shows, blockbuster feature films and more.
Help us sound people out!
"Help us sound people out!"
Happily - this....is a wire. Have fun, I'll be on the internet!
Everything wireless needs to move off of blocking analog types, and move to non-blocking error resilient digital transfer standards. That includes you sound guys. I could care less if you spent too much money on some crappy wireless headphones, using radio space not specifically allocated to it. I could care even less about the "investments" (read: monopoly bribes) TV and radio broadcast companies make towards their spectrum monopolies. Modern radio space can be shared, rather than squatted exclusively as it is now. It's called progress -- get used to it.
The reality is that most wireless mic users have never legally licensed their systems, so the wireless mic manufacturers have been selling gear to users who have not bothered to operate them legally.
I don't get why the audio gear manufacturers should get to take a free ride on the public's spectrum.
By definition we're talking about open space, the radio equivalent of the commons. Obviously you want to avoid a tragedy of the commons situation where everyone uses what is free to the detriment of the open space, but that shouldn't mean that the current free-loaders should get a pass on whatever sharing of the bandwidth has to be arranged.
Maybe the price that has to be paid on that end is that the audio equipment has to be redesigned so that it frequency hops and adjusts for the other signals out there competing for the space and maybe that makes the equipment a bit more expensive. The wireless systems to connect to the internet will have the same constraints and same costs built into them as well.
Seems to me to be fair if everyone, regardless of their use has to pay the price (in terms of more sophisticated equipment) in order to share the open space in a way that doesn't make the open space useless to everyone.
This problem is much bigger than someone using an iPhone to watch YouTube clips while standing in line at the megaplex to see "Nightmare on Elm Street XXIV" - the mics and systems that this will interfere with are in hotels, conference rooms, broadcasts, theaters, etc. This is a HUGE deal - and if you didn't know - they tested some of the new prototype whiz-bang "self sensing devices" last Monday before the Monday Night Football broadcasts and they failed miserably. And at God-only-knows what price a concert ticket goes for next week - to have a performance ruined by some person with a wireless device they forgot to turn off - it just doesn't make any sense. A for the record, the "commons" comparison holds no water. There are huge chunks of radio frequencies that are off limits to the public and used by law enforcement, the military, aviation, etc. The "white spaces" is really a misnomer from the creation of digital television broadcasts.
Ahhh, was happened with the spectrum that Verizon bought from the FCC? And why didn't google just buy that spectrum and do what it wants with it....like some good. And can we get some wimax updates...these are things that would make life better - its called competition. WTF, what happened to the american spirit of allowing the best products and services to compete on the open market....and for you about to say lobbying and big money, i know...i live in DC
"its called competition. WTF, what happened to the american spirit of allowing the best products and services to compete on the open market"
I'd say you have a very unusual definition of "competition" here. Technologies that exist now, on constrained spectrum segments like WiFi, already prove that radio space can be shared among arbitrary numbers of users. There is no need to grant any one WiFi user spectrum or space use monopolies -- why should that be necessary in ANY spectrum segment? Digital radio space sharing is now proven technology -- the entire spectrum use space market should adapt NOW.
Monopolies are useless -- spectrum monopolies only exist in wireless business now because the backwards FCC (government thugs) enforces them. There is nothing natural or competitive about the way wireless spectrum is currently allocated. Broadcast is dead -- WiFi, and similar spectrum/space sharing technologies, should be given ALL the spectrum.
Wait...how does geolocation solve the problem of interference with other personal wireless devices?? Or are they talking about performance venues only?
The FCC doesn't grant their spectrum monopolies Universally. They give monopolies out for specific spectrum segments, on small parcels of the U.S. map. Coordinating GPS data with the FCC allocation map allows a product to automatically avoid overlapping spectrum already allocated in that map, even if the spectrum isn't *currently* being used, and thus cannot be detected by other means.
If the FCC hasn't granted any spectrum monopoly in a given segment on a given parcel, that open segment should be up for grabs by anyone, with any sufficient wireless communications device, currently wandering through that parcel.
Another way of looking at it is this hypothetical government body: the Federal Breathing Air Commission. FBAC grants rights to breathe certain air. The FBAC might grant some megacorps right to the air 100's of feet over certain cities. Right now, the megacorps are trying to say that nobody can breathe their air, as if they own all the air, even outside their FBAC granted vertical air boundary. Google is trying to say that anybody should be able to breathe the air outside of that defined boundary, any time they walk through it. They are trying to give us back the right to the air we breathe -- taking it back from greedy megacorps who want to keep all the air for themselves, even when they aren't using it.
I'd like to have someone recommend some links where I can read more about Google's plans and about the FCC plans for this space if anyone has any great ones to recommend...
Other than that I have a few comments. First, to the napster commentor.....musicians at every level need to be able to protect their copyrighted intellectual property. They have a right to the earnings that come with each "play" from their catalog as much as anyone who writes a book has a right to royalties. If anyone works hard to create something, they should be the primary beneficiary of that work....not some 3rd party who is profiting from unauthorized use of the work.
At the same time, the musicians who use this equipment in concert venues can likely afford to upgrade their equipment in whatever way progress demands.
The musicians who use this equipment and are still in the "struggling musician" category will likely find a "work around". Maybe they'll have to go back to wired equipment...or they'll create something new. I worked as a musician for years and always had to find "work arounds" for any number of challenges.
That's my 2 cents....
Theatre, television, concerts, and even churches - it's not even high end productions any more. Philips' test really bombed. It may be open space, but audio has been pushed into a corner. It's like Fedex buying planes only to see the number of available airports falling five years later. We are talking about investments, not like the personal stuff that will be tossed after 18 months.
Please don't make this A2's life harder!
Seriously, these aren't really audio techs bitching about this, are they? I mean settle down!! Any IT guy will tell you that the more the computers cost the more important their job is. You're lookin' at some BIG FAT raises.
No, I really think these are just audio mfr corporate shills, aren't they? Come on, either you're just another suit or you simply forgot that this was really a good thing for you. Which is it?